On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Lars Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Right, I get that, and Brendan's point was a good one. I was > > just thrown by the fact that I hadn't seen an example of > > > > class A { > > var public::count = 10; > > } > > > > rather than > > > > class A { > > public var count = 10; > > } > > > > But if the former is legal (and the grammar suggests that it > > is), then there's no inconsistency. > > It is not legal, and if the grammar suggests that it is then > the grammar is buggy.
Okay, so why is it a good thing to mandate a different syntax for defining an object property in an initializer, on one hand, and defining a property of a class instance, on the other? Don't get me wrong: I understand the utility of allowing the "public var count = ..." syntax, where 'var' in interposed between the two parts of the name. What I don't understand is why you wouldn't want a single, canonical syntax for expressing names in definitions. "public var count": could just be sugar for "var public::count". Or does that raise other problems...? _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss